The Archives of U.S. Foundations: an Endangered Species, Part 1
January 9, 2013

John E. Craig, Jr., is Executive Vice President &
COO of The Commonwealth Fund. He recently presented at a Philanthropy New York
event on Why Archives Matter, which was the subject of an earlier blog post here.

A foundation’s archives preserve records of the programs, activities,
products, governance, people, and history of the organization that may have
enduring cultural, historical, research, or institutional value. Yet, despite
the important role archives play in a field that focuses on investing in ideas,
a recently released survey about foundation record management practices reveals
that only a small minority maintain foundation archives, so clearly there is a
need to make a case for why foundations should devote resources to archive
development and management. There are at least six compelling reasons for why
foundations should give their inactive files and historical records serious
attention:

1. Historical Research on Social and Economic
Developments and Influential Institutions and Individuals. The late Paul Ylvisaker described philanthropy as “America’s passing gear,” and foundations serve this purpose in numerous ways: by helping to launch movements (such as civil rights, environmental protection, or health care reform); by developing
new institutions and strengthening existing ones; by making society more
inclusive through support of programs to improve the lot of vulnerable
populations; by building up the knowledge base for social improvements and

“…no history of the civil rights movement would be complete without access to the permanent records of the Ford Foundation; no history of the development of the “miracle” rice strains that sparked the Green Revolution… would be complete without the records of the Rockefeller and Ford foundations; and no history of the health care reform legislation of 2010 would be complete without the records of The Commonwealth Fund, the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation…”

scientific advancement and, through the support of individual researchers,
contributing to the nation’s intellectual capital; and by strengthening the
social fabric and physical capital of the communities in which foundations
operate. In the hands of good researchers, the records of foundations can provide
guidance for future generations in tackling new and continuing social problems.
As examples, no history of the civil rights movement would be complete without
access to the permanent records of the Ford Foundation; no history of the
development of the “miracle” rice strains that sparked the Green Revolution,
which helped transform Southeast Asian societies in the 1960s and 1970s, would
be complete without the records of the Rockefeller and Ford foundations; and no
history of the health care reform legislation of 2010 would be complete without
the records of The Commonwealth Fund, the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation, and other national and regional health care
philanthropies.

2. Promoting Accountability in the Foundation
SectorThe permanent
records of foundations help foster accountability among this very privileged
group of institutions. Foundations, given their exemption from most federal and
state taxes, owe it to the public to provide clear and accessible records of
how they have conducted their business and what they have accomplished—records
that enable rigorous independent assessments of the impact of foundations’
strategies and programmatic investments.

3. Protecting the Foundation Sector and
Defending Institutions from Misinformed Attacks
Individual
foundations and the sector as a whole periodically come under attack—by
regulators, elected officials, the media, or academics. In the absence of good
historical records, foundations are at risk of not being able to make their
case for being tax-exempt convincingly, or they may simply be caught flatfooted
in being able to produce records of their accomplishments and actual behavior.

4. Facilitating Strategic Planning and
Fostering a Learning-from-Experience CultureArchival records
enrich the research base for consideration of foundations’ future directions
and help ensure program continuity. The lessons from earlier experience that
they hold can help prevent strategic and tactical mistakes by current and
future foundation managers.

5. Ensuring Institutional Memory and Sense of
Accomplishment
Permanent
archives are also a primary source for the institutional memory that is vital
to learning organizations, and for the institutional pride that ensures the
strong staff morale needed to achieve high performance.

6. Good Management and Administrative
Efficiency
Finally, the
care given to archives is a beneficial operational discipline, with orderly
archives being a reflection of efficient office practices and good management.
Inactive records are not allowed to pile up and get in the way of current files
and information from inactive files can be achieved quickly when needed.

2012 Survey of Foundation
ArchivesAs important as archives are for
good foundation management, a confidential December 2012 survey of the 300
largest foundations conducted for The Commonwealth Fund by Mathew Greenwald
& Associates finds that, even among very large foundations, no more than 20
percent maintain archives. The survey findings are reported on The Commonwealth
Fund’s Web site. The surveyed institutions account for
approximately 52 percent of the foundation sector’s endowment assets, including
private, community, corporate, and operating foundations. Among the responding
foundations, those with larger endowments, those with larger staffs, and those
that are older were found to be more likely to maintain archives.

The survey revealed that only 37
percent of the non-archiving large foundations have formal short-term
records-retention policies as required for nonprofits under the 2002 federal
Sarbanes-Oxley legislation—suggesting worrisome laxity or informality with
respect to institutional record-keeping within the sector.

The 2012 survey found that most
large foundations without archives warehouse their historical records, at least
for a time (48%), but many simply allow files to accumulate in their offices
(Exhibit 1). Twenty percent of this group gave “doubt of the importance of
historical records” as a major reason for not maintaining archives, but neither
cost nor privacy or confidentiality was identified as a major reason. A sizeable
number of foundations cited their youth as contributing to their failure to set
up archives, explaining that the issue is either something they have not yet
gotten to or have not needed to address thus far.

For large foundations that do have
archives, the 2012 survey found that two-thirds manage them in-house; 17
percent place their historical records with independent nonprofit archive
centers; 9 percent place records with a historical society, museum, or research
library; and 7 percent place them with a university or college archive (Exhibit
2). An example of a very large foundation that historically managed its
archives internally but recently switched to the outsourced model is the Ford
Foundation. Ford selected as its repository in 2012 the Rockefeller Archive
Center, which is the independent archive organization most often used by large
foundations, including, since 1985, The Commonwealth Fund.

Many foundations that maintain
archives put all important records in them since the foundation’s founding.
Foundations generally follow traditional archiving practices in preserving
program files, the foundation’s publications, public relations documents,
organizational records (for example, board and committee minutes), key
administrative records, and, if they produce them, photographs, documentaries,
and videos. Most institutions do not archive declined proposals and no longer
attempt to keep traditional archival material like officers’ calendars.
External archive centers typically do not accept financial or human resources
records, owing to lack of space and to processing priorities. Most foundations
with archives (80%) are not preserving important e-mail correspondence, and
over half are not archiving Web site information.

The survey found that the cost of
archives varied with foundation size, age, and the nature of the foundation’s work.
For a 94-year old, $650 million foundation with extensive intramural program
operations and publications like The Commonwealth Fund, the annual costs of
archives is about $100,000. The mean annual cost reported in the survey was
$60,000.

Most foundations restrict
researchers’ access to their archives, but nearly half will permit access if
the research objective is deemed worthwhile (Exhibit 3). About a third (31%)
routinely open their archives to researchers. The most common restriction is on
access to administrative records.

Like other institutions,
foundations see their archiving system at risk of being overwhelmed with the
influx of materials. Even so, foundations with archives are staying on top of
the paper flow relatively well: two-thirds say that at least 75 percent of
records sent to archives have been processed Many foundations with archives are
using their own information technology systems to advance archiving objectives,
and some are quite advanced in doing so. But for over half, IT system
improvements could improve archiving performance. Half of the foundations that
currently have archives expect that, over time, their archives will be
primarily electronic, and another 40 percent foresee a growing role for IT in
their archiving practices (Exhibit 4).

Most foundations with assets under
several billion dollars find that outsourcing their archives to an external
center is more efficient than attempting to build a professional internal
archives unit. The survey found that half of foundations using external
archives centers find the services, overall, to be “very good” to “excellent,” and
another 35 percent rate the services “satisfactory.” Echoing challenges facing
the archiving profession, the chief areas of concern are timeliness in
processing materials and using information technology to maximum advantage. Foundations
report that researchers are well served by external archive centers.

Clearly, the state of foundation
archives is a neglected “glasspockets” issue in the sector. In a follow-up
blog, I will present some recommendations for improving the archiving practices
of foundations.

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Name is required to post a comment

Please enter a valid email address

Invalid URL

Name:

Email address:

URL:

Comment:

About Transparency Talk

Transparency Talk, the Glasspockets blog, is a platform for candid and constructive conversation about foundation transparency and accountability. In this space, the Foundation Center highlights strategies, findings, and best practices on the web and in foundations–illuminating the importance of having "glass pockets."

The views expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foundation Center.